Hi Phillip,
On Sun, 2 Jun 2019, Phillip Wood wrote:
> On 22/03/2019 14:06, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 13 Sep 2018, Phillip Wood wrote:
> >
> > > On 03/09/2018 20:01, Jochen Sprickerhof wrote:
> > >
> > > > * Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@xxxxxxxxxxxx> [2018-08-30 14:47]:
> > > >
> > > > > We could restore the old test condition and coalesce the hunks
> > > > > by copying all the hunks and setting $hunk->{USE}=1 when
> > > > > creating the test patch if that turns out to be useful (it would
> > > > > be interesting to see if the test still passes with that
> > > > > change).
> > > >
> > > > We set USE=1 for $newhunk already, or where would you set it?
> > >
> > > To match the old test it needs to be set on the hunks we've skipped
> > > or haven't got to yet so they're all in the patch that's tested
> > > after editing a hunk.
> >
> > The way I fixed this in the C code is by teaching the equivalent of
> > the `coalesce_overlapping_hunks()` function to simply ignore the
> > equivalent of `$hunk->{USE}`: the function signature takes an
> > additional `use_all` parameter, which will override the `use` field.
>
> That sounds like a good solution. Thanks for working on the conversion
> to C, I'll try and find time look at the code on github.
Please note that I did not update the Pull Requests on GitGitGadget
lately, as I had no reviewer feedback on #170 and did not want to waste
too much time on synchronizing my work between those PRs and Git for Windows
(which now has the built-in `git add -i` as an opt-in feature).
So: the latest patches (as of time of writing) can be found here:
https://github.com/git-for-windows/git/compare/9f09372011%5E...9f09372011%5E2
Thanks,
Dscho
